Are Tanks and Armored Vehicles Obsolete

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Feb 27, 2009
Messages
8,049
Location
down in the park
As to Russia.. if they are isolated.. well then. What will they do now.. are they really failing in their war advance, a la Hitler and his two front advance in winter that lost him the war? Historians largely agree that he was "winning" the war up to that point.. everyone I talk to says, yeah, maybe, but he would have been overwhelmed by the force of the opposition eventually. Glad we never found out. Coward.

Happy St Patrick's Day, everyone. Sláinte.

So far they aren't failling yet. They are making progress in the south, the land bridge between Crimea and Russia is near complete and they are advancing towards Moldova, asell as towards the north.

They face the stiffest resistance in donetsk and lugansk (that area had been at war since 2014 so defenses had been developped) and around Kiev. But the Ukrainian troops defending donetsk and lugansk are in danger of being encircled, as is Kiev.
 
Joined
Apr 15, 2010
Messages
8,704
Location
Atlanta,GA
He did have a point though when he said "What if Ukraine joins nato and then decides to take back Crimea by force? That would lead to a Russia/Nato conflict, one that Russia can't possibly win so wouldn't hesitate to go nuclear."

Nato attacked several countries though. serbia, libya... calling it a police action or peacekeeping mission doesn't make it any less an attack.
Kinda like how the Cubans with the help of the Soviets took over GITMO? Oh wait. Nevermind that Turkey (NATO member) holds the keys for any ship wanting access to global oceans from the Black Sea.
 
Joined
Nov 20, 2006
Messages
29,190
Location
MA, Mittelfranken.de
Putin is trying to take back and reform the "old Russia" ... the one that existed before all the areas he's trying to get back had enough of Russia's rule and broke away to have a better way of living. That's the sole reason that NATO was created, to form an allegiance by the close counties to the west of Russia to form a stronger deterrent from future Russian aggression. This video does a good job of explaining some past history.



The Cuban missile crisis isn't really that analogous to what Russia is doing in Ukraine. Russia's goal during the Cuba missile crisis wasn't to "invade and take over" the USA because the USA use to be part of Russia. It was basically a deterrent by Russia during the cold war to help "protect" Cuba and give Russia an advantage to retaliate quicker if the USA ever attacked Russia or Cuba.

Thing is, Putin knows that NATO isn't going to attack Russia, so his invasion into Ukraine isn't really because he feels like NATO is going to attack him - if he actually thinks that then he's delusional and paranoid, which are the base ingredients to make for a true mad-man. NATO would never be an attacker of any country, only a defender against an attack. Putin is invading the Ukraine and any other bordering countries who are not part of NATO because he knows if they ever do join NATO that he will never be able to do a take-over with military force. He's doing it now because he's old, and he thinks this is the only opportunity for him to try and carry out a take-over that he's been thinking about for years, so he's acting it out now. And he has nukes, which he's using as a threat to try and get his way.


Just looking at him you can see the effects of heavy steroid use.
 
Joined
Aug 5, 2002
Messages
21,414
Location
Silicon Valley
He seems to be eating too many hallucinogenic mushrooms too.
Just looking at him you can see the effects of heavy steroid use.
It's just aging. When people reach late 60s early 70s they all start aging like that. The thing is who would be his successor when he pass and how long will he lives.

You want to see steroid use look at our Governator. He seems to be ok without going psycho (although he may not be smart to begin with either).
 
Joined
May 18, 2012
Messages
7,846
Location
Baltimore, Maryland, USA
Tanks have been becoming obsolete ever since the Panzerfaust was invented.


300px-Bundesarchiv_Bild_101I-710-0371-20,_Ukraine,_Ausbildung_an_Panzerabwehrwaffe.jpg
 
Joined
Dec 28, 2011
Messages
4,504
A10! Nuff said. If you served or have friends who have been boots on the ground, our troops love the A10 and appreciate the pilots.
 
Joined
Apr 27, 2012
Messages
13,466
Location
MA
Tanks have been becoming obsolete ever since the Panzerfaust was invented.
It's the proper application of combined arms which was part of Blitzkrieg. You can't say armor is a failure when the Russians aren't using it correctly. You're supposed to have infantry in front of the armor and also air support to eliminate short range anti tank weapons. Javelin has a longer range though.

And Panzerfaust didn't stop the Germans from losing the war either.

You want to see steroid use look at our Governator. He seems to be ok without going psycho (although he may not be smart to begin with either).
Oh yeah speaking of him, he just posted some video.

 

Al

Thread starter
Joined
Jun 8, 2002
Messages
19,705
Location
Elizabethtown, Pa
Putin is trying to take back and reform the "old Russia" ... the one that existed before all the areas he's trying to get back had enough of Russia's rule and broke away to have a better way of living. That's the sole reason that NATO was created, to form an allegiance by the close counties to the west of Russia to form a stronger deterrent from future Russian aggression. This video does a good job of explaining some past history.

Thing is, Putin knows that NATO isn't going to attack Russia, so his invasion into Ukraine isn't really because he feels like NATO is going to attack him - if he actually thinks that then he's delusional and paranoid, which are the base ingredients to make for a true mad-man. NATO would never be an attacker of any country, only a defender against an attack. Putin is invading the Ukraine and any other bordering countries who are not part of NATO because he knows if they ever do join NATO that he will never be able to do a take-over with military force. He's doing it now because he's old, and he thinks this is the only opportunity for him to try and carry out a take-over that he's been thinking about for years, so he's acting it out now. And he has nukes, which he's using as a threat to try and get his way.

Well thought out post like your filter posts.
Yes Putin's goal is as you say..before he dies. He has permanently destroyed Russia while he is alive. Only his removal/death can put Russia on recovery. For its size and resources, Russia has under performed since at least 1900. The U.S.is great bc its people are allowed to innovate and profit from this innovation.

Russia is steeped in corruption and always has been. To advance; ambitious folks need to succeed in the corruption environment. They have to work within the "system". Ukraine may be be physically destroyed. But those that are left will rebuild and they will be aided with a World Marshall Plan. My grandson is a 2nd Lt. in Army Engineers (Flat). He indicated they will go in to help rebuild. Putin is a "Dead Man Walking". I am sure with his dying breath he will attempt to "press the button." Doubt he will be able to.
 

ZeeOSix

$100 site donor 2022
Joined
Jul 22, 2010
Messages
35,025
Location
PNW
Oh yeah speaking of him, he just posted some video.


Good message from Arnold ... hopefully his message will somehow spread across Russia. The more the people of Russia learn the truth, the more likely it will all implode on mad-man Putin.
 
Joined
Aug 5, 2002
Messages
21,414
Location
Silicon Valley
Well thought out post like your filter posts.
Yes Putin's goal is as you say..before he dies. He has permanently destroyed Russia while he is alive. Only his removal/death can put Russia on recovery. For its size and resources, Russia has under performed since at least 1900. The U.S.is great bc its people are allowed to innovate and profit from this innovation.

Russia is steeped in corruption and always has been. To advance; ambitious folks need to succeed in the corruption environment. They have to work within the "system". Ukraine may be be physically destroyed. But those that are left will rebuild and they will be aided with a World Marshall Plan. My grandson is a 2nd Lt. in Army Engineers (Flat). He indicated they will go in to help rebuild. Putin is a "Dead Man Walking". I am sure with his dying breath he will attempt to "press the button." Doubt he will be able to.

There are many kind of corruptions in humanity. Military dictatorship, Monopoly, Religious rules, Trade Cartels, etc. Winners wrote histories so the only way I would trust is whether people have reasonable upward mobility or whether they give up and just goof off in lives.

The monarch ruling days of Europe prior to industrial revolutions, prior to Napoleon advancing the way governments and military operates, the days prior to UK going on its own breaking away from the Holy See (and use the resources to defeat Spainish Armada instead of religion), the days prior to the American Revolution, etc. They are all the same to me as the inequality eventually leads to up-rising. Soviet days were the same, China prior to their switch to market economy was the same.

One thing Russia did wrong was focusing too much on military, and ignoring the lower level economy that impacts the populations. China probably has just as much if not worse of a corruption problem, most top level corruption cases reaches billions, generals inherit their titles from their parents, top politicians send their families to the US and became citizens here so they could not be held hostages by their political rivals, etc.

What Russian could have done is develop their civilian economy, they could have replaced India in IT and they could have replaced Turkey for auto manufacturing, they could probably even replace China as the European factories. They didn't. Unlike China who let their generals do manufacturing startups, smuggle civilian goods across borders, so they can benefit from the economic boom, Russian just spend their money on military and weapon instead of giving them a stake of the growth. Obviously this means the incentive to rebuild USSR as a military power is a bigger priority than building an economic power and tolerate bullying like China tolerate Taiwan having US weapons, protections, and Japan taking the islands nearby chasing their fishermen away, etc.

N Korea has the same problem. If anything corruption would motivates them to do the right thing instead.
 
Joined
Mar 20, 2015
Messages
10,631
Location
Virginia
Putin is trying to take back and reform the "old Russia" ... the one that existed before all the areas he's trying to get back had enough of Russia's rule and broke away to have a better way of living. That's the sole reason that NATO was created, to form an allegiance by the close counties to the west of Russia to form a stronger deterrent from future Russian aggression. This video does a good job of explaining some past history.



The Cuban missile crisis isn't really that analogous to what Russia is doing in Ukraine. Russia's goal during the Cuba missile crisis wasn't to "invade and take over" the USA because the USA use to be part of Russia. It was basically a deterrent by Russia during the cold war to help "protect" Cuba and give Russia an advantage to retaliate quicker if the USA ever attacked Russia or Cuba.

Thing is, Putin knows that NATO isn't going to attack Russia, so his invasion into Ukraine isn't really because he feels like NATO is going to attack him - if he actually thinks that then he's delusional and paranoid, which are the base ingredients to make for a true mad-man. NATO would never be an attacker of any country, only a defender against an attack. Putin is invading the Ukraine and any other bordering countries who are not part of NATO because he knows if they ever do join NATO that he will never be able to do a take-over with military force. He's doing it now because he's old, and he thinks this is the only opportunity for him to try and carry out a take-over that he's been thinking about for years, so he's acting it out now. And he has nukes, which he's using as a threat to try and get his way.




You clearly missed my point....

About Cuba....

We aka we the US ALMOST invaded Cuba.. During the missle crisis.. And the Bay of Pigs... Attempting killing their leader.

We the US almost invaded Cuba for fear of nuclear weapons being on that island. Which obviously they were there. .

Not too mention the fact we kinda didn't like their leadership.

Vlad has grown quite tired of eastern push of NATO and US intrusion.

I agree with you he does want to reunification of the old USSR empire. That is true. He has stated that himself.

Still.. . Box a dangerous animal in a corner... Never a intelligent action to take.

We have been doing that for a long time. It's not been a wise or judicious course of action.
 
Joined
Aug 5, 2002
Messages
21,414
Location
Silicon Valley
Still.. . Box a dangerous animal in a corner... Never a intelligent action to take.
It is ok to box a dangerous animal in a corner if you try to slaughter it, instead of trying to take its cubs away and let it go.

I do not think NATO was prepared for a full blown invasion into Russia and take out the entire leadership. I'm sure we can come up with some BS excuses like human always can (killing 3000 people is not a legitimate reason when a war can cost 300K lives on YOUR side alone), but the collateral damage, economic cost, life loss, etc would make it impractical and turn it into a lose-lose situation for nothing to gain.

Although China is sitting on the sideline right now, if Russia fall the only realistic enemy remains in the world for NATO is China, and China wouldn't like it at all. Which means, if Russia wasn't doing well China would go all in to help out like they did in the Korean War, until a truce is declared. Which goes back to the "why are you boxing a dangerous animal in a corner just to take a cub away from it but not killing it".
 
Joined
Dec 31, 2017
Messages
12,470
Location
SE British Columbia, Canada
It is ok to box a dangerous animal in a corner if you try to slaughter it, instead of trying to take its cubs away and let it go.

I do not think NATO was prepared for a full blown invasion into Russia and take out the entire leadership. I'm sure we can come up with some BS excuses like human always can (killing 3000 people is not a legitimate reason when a war can cost 300K lives on YOUR side alone), but the collateral damage, economic cost, life loss, etc would make it impractical and turn it into a lose-lose situation for nothing to gain.

Although China is sitting on the sideline right now, if Russia fall the only realistic enemy remains in the world for NATO is China, and China wouldn't like it at all. Which means, if Russia wasn't doing well China would go all in to help out like they did in the Korean War, until a truce is declared. Which goes back to the "why are you boxing a dangerous animal in a corner just to take a cub away from it but not killing it".
I’m no history expert, but if you go back to when Japan invaded Manchuria, I believe sanctions were applied to Japan by the USA, especially with their access to oil from Indonesia. This would be like boxing the animal. One result of this was Pearl Harbour.
 
Joined
Aug 5, 2002
Messages
21,414
Location
Silicon Valley
I’m no history expert, but if you go back to when Japan invaded Manchuria, I believe sanctions were applied to Japan by the USA, especially with their access to oil from Indonesia. This would be like boxing the animal. One result of this was Pearl Harbour.
They also seriously miscalculated whether they can keep Hawaii due to it being a former sovereign nation before a coup turned it into a US colony (or state). I wouldn't be surprised their original calculation was the Kingdom of Hawaii would have enough local non white support to turn it into another Manchuria.

The biggest winner of WW2 was the US mainly due to being the neutral player at the beginning, trading with both sides (yes we sold oil to the Nazi and Japan during their early invasion time), and only joined later on after the Pearl Harbor. Had US been at the forefront of WW2 from the beginning, we may not fare so well at the end. We could easily be like UK or France, losing most of the colonies, weakened currency and hyperinflation, no longer a super power (was US even a super power before WW2?), etc. Instead of that we now have Japan and S Korea as our pseudo colony (in terms of military base).
 
Joined
Dec 28, 2011
Messages
4,504
They also seriously miscalculated whether they can keep Hawaii due to it being a former sovereign nation before a coup turned it into a US colony (or state). I wouldn't be surprised their original calculation was the Kingdom of Hawaii would have enough local non white support to turn it into another Manchuria.

The biggest winner of WW2 was the US mainly due to being the neutral player at the beginning, trading with both sides (yes we sold oil to the Nazi and Japan during their early invasion time), and only joined later on after the Pearl Harbor. Had US been at the forefront of WW2 from the beginning, we may not fare so well at the end. We could easily be like UK or France, losing most of the colonies, weakened currency and hyperinflation, no longer a super power (was US even a super power before WW2?), etc. Instead of that we now have Japan and S Korea as our pseudo colony (in terms of military base).
I believe the biggest winners of WWII was the bankers. War is massively profitable for bankers. Debt is how money is made and its just about the only thing not taxed. Think on that.
 

Pew

Joined
Mar 12, 2018
Messages
2,257
Location
IL
Back to tanks.

Tanks are a big physical and bigger psychological threat. They're big, loud, and have huge main guns and aux MGs that can really reach out and touch somebody. Having them attached to you is like swinging the biggest meat stick around.....at least until the entire neighborhood knows you're there. Keep the front facing the enemy, rule the skies, dig in, and armor still has it's uses as the king of the ground in a 3D battlefield.

Sure you got the infantry guy carrying everything from LAWs to Javs, each with their own pros and cons because good luck hitting anything over 300m with a LAW or trying to box in your target on a 50lb Jav tube on your shoulder with a flak on after your CO is asking higher brass to approve the use of a Jav.

Buuuuuut...
  1. No complete air superiority. Helos and CAS support looks pretty bare.
  2. Lack of infantry support. Whose idea was it to assault a city with no infantry support?
  3. Lack of training. See #2
  4. Lack of mobility. Armor doesn't like muddy stuff.
 

ZeeOSix

$100 site donor 2022
Joined
Jul 22, 2010
Messages
35,025
Location
PNW
Vlad has grown quite tired of eastern push of NATO and US intrusion.

I agree with you he does want to reunification of the old USSR empire. That is true. He has stated that himself.
The whole Cuban missile crisis event isn't really analogous in any way except for the fact that some countries feel "threatened" if opposing forces with weapons are too close to a boarder - that stuff has been going on as long as weapons were invented. If some neighbors living in my neighborhood don't seem to like me (ie, I'm "Russia" and my neighbors are "NATO"), and I know they have some weapons in there house located close to me, should I make a surprise attack on them and takeover and kill them because I'm paranoid and think they might do the same to me first? Only a paranoid mad-man would do that.

The main reason Putin is going into Ukraine is to "reclaim" the area (he wants as much of the the "old Russia" back as possible as the video posted previously explained), not because he's really feeling pressure from NATO. NATO has been around a long time, and all of a sudden Putin just decides he doesn't like it anymore? I doubt that is driving his motives much except with respect that he knows that if the Ukraine ever joins NATO that he has zero chance of "reclaiming" it, and yes then NATO would be even closer - boohoo for Russia. He's striking now, because it's the only window he can see to try his cockamamie "plan".

Still.. . Box a dangerous animal in a corner... Never a intelligent action to take.

We have been doing that for a long time. It's not been a wise or judicious course of action.
Dangerous animals need to be controlled ... and exterminated if possible. Dangerous animals get noticed because of their own actions, and Putin is showing all of his true colors right now.

Should the countries around Russia be afraid to not try to strive for a non-repressive way of life because of one mad-man? The countries that broke away from Russia did it for that very reason. Maybe the leaders of Russia should change the way they operate and parts of it wouldn't break away.
 
Last edited:

Al

Thread starter
Joined
Jun 8, 2002
Messages
19,705
Location
Elizabethtown, Pa
The main reason Putin is going into Ukraine is to "reclaim" the area (he wants as much of the the "old Russia" back as possible as the video posted previously explained), not because he's really feeling pressure from NATO. NATO has been around a long time, and all of a sudden Putin just decides he doesn't like it anymore? I doubt that is driving his motives much except with respect that he knows that if the Ukraine ever joins NATO that he has zero chance of "reclaiming" it, and yes then NATO would be even closer - boohoo for Russia. He's striking now, because it's the only window he can see to try his cockamamie "plan".
This. He just did not count on the strength of the Ukrainians.. He thought he could bring them into the fold before NATO could organize and "unite". Now he is cooked. He can't posibly win even if he totally trashes Ukrain. Russia will be a third world country as long as he is around. Interesting how long it takes the "people", oligarchs, Generals and his drinking budies to throw him overboard to feed the sharks.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top